Ron - Interesting link! However, they seem to do a visual accounting of finger lengths, while on the GTD, we measure them. If I look at my hands, my ring fingers appear to be longer, but with the measurement as indicated by Dr D, my index fingers are 1 mm longer.

Posted by: 521 (Guest), Friday, January 25, 2008, 10:13am; Reply: 2

Olerica,

The measurement system that Dr. D talks about makes sense, because the palm part itself curves along the base of the fingers, so you really do have to start measuring from there...

I'd like to blame my inability to excell at distance running on my finger lenght thanks to that article. Though I don't like that the one researcher seems to dismiss the athletic potential of those with high ratios...

wow, same here! fingers facing me, my ring finger looks decidely longer, palm facing.....not much difference. and not to knock someone's suggestion of photocopying their hand from the palm side and measuring(which does sound like a good suggestion), but don't you have to press the ruler down to the bottom of the web in your finger? Maybe I'm doing it wrong????

... but don't you have to press the ruler down to the bottom of the web in your finger?

That's sort of what I had assumed -- actually I figured the important thing was to use comparable pressure on the webbing each time. But apparently the audio on the video says to measure from the crease (though the video itself shows measuring on the knuckle side). I haven't seen it, because any UTube's longer than a few seconds take forEVER to download over my dial-up connection.

In my case, the two methods amount to about the same thing -- the top of my webs is fairly even with my creases. My only problem with the "crease" method is that some of my fingers have *two* parallel creases at the base. I'm assuming I'd use the one closest to my palm.

But my index fingers are a whole half inch longer than my ring fingers, so I'm not obsessing with that. ;D

Ron - Interesting link! However, they seem to do a visual accounting of finger lengths, while on the GTD, we measure them. If I look at my hands, my ring fingers appear to be longer, but with the measurement as indicated by Dr D, my index fingers are 1 mm longer.

I agree. You can physically distort the shape of your palm and visibly change finger ratio.

However, if I stand in front of a mirror and look at my hands hanging by my sides, it'sobvious that my ring fingers are longer. And it's confirmed when I measure them.

Sex hormones in the womb are known to influence the mind, the fingers and the general development. A new research published in the journal "Arthritis & Rheumatism" has found that women with long ring fingers could have a higher rate of knee arthritis. Normally, women should have index and ring fingers of the same length, while men usually possess longer ring fingers.

The new research shows that women with longer ring fingers present a double likelihood of knee arthritis, compared to common situations.

"Specifically, women with the male pattern of length ratio - that is, ring finger relatively longer than the index finger - are more likely to develop knee arthritis. The underlying mechanism of the risk is unclear and merits further exploration", said lead researcher Professor Michael Doherty, from Nottingham University.

His team investigated the hands of 2,000 arthritis patients and 1,000 healthy control subjects, all sexagenarian. The researchers made radiographies of both hands of the subjects, and fingers' length was determined through 3 methods: direct visual assessment of the two finger tips, measurement from base to the tip and measurement of the bone length. The results took into account risk factors like joint injury and sedentariness. Another study had revealed that females with longer ring fingers were generally better sportswomen.

By now, researchers can only guess the cause: partially genetics, but it could also be about increased exposure to male sex hormone testosterone during the uterine development.

The testosterone levels in women (and their wombs) vary a lot from case to case, and the hormone affects bone development (and not only).

Longer ring fingers have been linked by various researches to high womb testosterone exposure. In men, the opposite (a much longer index finger) has been connected to depression and homosexuality. This could be due to high exposure to estrogen, the female sex hormone, in the womb. Women are known to be more prone to depression. The opposite, an extremely short index finger (linked to higher than normal testosterone amounts in the womb) has been linked to increased aggressiveness in children (testosterone induces aggressiveness).

A 2007 research revealed that similarly long ring fingers and index fingers were connected in children to increased skill for numeracy (a more male cognitive ability), while shorter ring fingers were connected to better results at literacy exams (a more female cognitive ability).

"Since 1998, Manning has published studies suggesting that male symphony orchestra musicians have lower finger ratios than less-musical men, that heterosexual men have lower ratios than homosexual men and that people with lower ratios tend to do better on certain tests of spatial ability."

My verdict: fascinating!

Posted by: 521 (Guest), Friday, January 25, 2008, 9:30pm; Reply: 9

Another way I thought of, in terms of measuring your fingers, would be to 1) straighten out your fingers, 2) point then straight down at a 90-degree angle from your palm, 3) look at them from the top side, and then 4) measure each finger from the very top of the knuckle, where each truly begins... There can be no doubt there, I don't think.

By the way, before society finds a way, as usual, to turn this finger thing into a means for mass recreational cruelty, such as

this is true.......my ring fingers are a bit longer and I have bad knees....... :B mine came from falling on concrete in the garage. LOL ::) ;) so interesting theory, that all aside. ;)

Posted by: Chloe, Friday, January 25, 2008, 9:44pm; Reply: 11

Quoted from 521

Another way I thought of, in terms of measuring your fingers, would be to 1) straighten out your fingers, 2) point then straight down at a 90-degree angle from your palm, 3) look at them from the top side, and then 4) measure each finger from the very top of the knuckle, where each truly begins... There can be no doubt there, I don't think.

By the way, before society finds a way, as usual, to turn this finger thing into a means for mass recreational cruelty, such as

Maybe the math/verbal connection refers to men more than women because my ring fingers are longer than my index fingers and I'm bad at math.

Posted by: 521 (Guest), Friday, January 25, 2008, 10:19pm; Reply: 12

Chloe,

As a former math tutor, I've never actually met anyone who's truly bad at math... What I have met are people who can't learn math under the "Just-Memorize-the-Procedures-and-You'll-Supposedly-Understand-Things" method.

When I teach math, I focus on the rationales behind all the formulas and the procedures... and I'm able to do this because, as a student, I was the one that most teachers hate: I was determined to really understand what I was being taught, so I made the supreme effort to really understand the reasons behind things.

Now, having done that (and I still continue to live that way), I find that I'm better able to teach the "math impaired". They typically think they're mentally inferior, until they find out that, in fact, their mental requirements for learning are far superior than what their teachers have been able to address.

As a former math tutor, I've never actually met anyone who's truly bad at math... What I have met are people who can't learn math under the "Just-Memorize-the-Procedures-and-You'll-Supposedly-Understand-Things" method.

When I teach math, I focus on the rationales behind all the formulas and the procedures... and I'm able to do this because, as a student, I was the one that most teachers hate: I was determined to really understand what I was being taught, so I made the supreme effort to really understand the reasons behind things.

Now, having done that (and I still continue to live that way), I find that I'm better able to teach the "math impaired". They typically think they're mentally inferior, until they find out that, in fact, their mental requirements for learning are far superior than what their teachers have been able to address.

I was the one that the math teachers hated, too. I gave up sometime very early on, in elementary school, because every time I tried to ask a question I was told to wait until the end and raise my hand, etc. But I needed to understand as we went along. If you lost me, you lost me, and I was off daydreaming about David Cassidy or something. Fuggedaboutit. I decided that all the other kids "got it" and I didn't so therefore I was dumb as a post in math and would never get it so why try? So I didn't. I'm amazed I'm not still in 2nd Grade, but apparently they had social promotion back then, because here I am, sprung from that jail right along with my peers, in fact, I'm younger than most in my class due to a September 15 birthday. I started kindergarten at four and graduated high school at 17, and I still can't do long division. I'm mathematically illiterate.

What is really ironic is that both of my parents are/were mathematicians.

Posted by: +Aan, Tuesday, January 29, 2008, 2:40pm; Reply: 14

In 4th grade Mrs. Anderson dug her nails in my arm because she couldn't relate to me how to do long division. No, I didn't tell my Mama. All Hell would've broke loose.....Aani (I finally figured it out)

Posted by: 2374 (Guest), Tuesday, January 29, 2008, 3:26pm; Reply: 15

All three articles are interesting and support Dr. D gene ideas. So many posts of this bulletin board are about finger length being the difference between Hunter and Gatherer. Many posts from thin women Gatherers who want to be Hunters, but they have long index fingers. Is Dr. D saying normal O men are Hunters and normal O women are Gatherers?

Posted by: TJ, Tuesday, January 29, 2008, 4:37pm; Reply: 16

Quoted from 2374

Is Dr. D saying normal O men are Hunters and normal O women are Gatherers?

I think that's a safe bet. Gatherers tend to have gynic traits, and hunters tend to have andric traits.

Quoted from 521

... What I have met are people who can't learn math under the "Just-Memorize-the-Procedures-and-You'll-Supposedly-Understand-Things" method.

When I teach math, I focus on the rationales behind all the formulas and the procedures... and I'm able to do this because, as a student, I was the one that most teachers hate: I was determined to really understand what I was being taught, so I made the supreme effort to really understand the reasons behind things.

That is exactly how I had to learn math! It worked well for me up through 2nd-semester calculus, because at that point, there was no getting around the need for memorization. I think I made my teachers a bit crazy, too, but I didn't let 'em go until I understood. Sometimes I had to talk to them after class to get that, but it was worth it.

As a former math tutor, I've never actually met anyone who's truly bad at math... What I have met are people who can't learn math under the "Just-Memorize-the-Procedures-and-You'll-Supposedly-Understand-Things" method.

When I teach math, I focus on the rationales behind all the formulas and the procedures... and I'm able to do this because, as a student, I was the one that most teachers hate: I was determined to really understand what I was being taught, so I made the supreme effort to really understand the reasons behind things.

Now, having done that (and I still continue to live that way), I find that I'm better able to teach the "math impaired". They typically think they're mentally inferior, until they find out that, in fact, their mental requirements for learning are far superior than what their teachers have been able to address.

I was talking to a psychologist at a large university some time ago, and he said that he worked with students all the time who had been messed up by math teachers in their earliest years and had never gotten over it. I'm sure your skill at tutoring had a lot to do with helping students overcome damage done by unskilled teachers. One skill that is so important is to know where the student stands and start the teaching from there. I'm sure you were a great tutor!

What is really ironic is that both of my parents are/were mathematicians.

I would say that your parents are mathematicians because they got precisely the sort of math education you never got, and it was precisely the sort of math education you needed, too, as you no doubt have much the same sort of meticulously logical thinking requirements as they do, being their daughter and all.

So I'm not sure I'd call it "irony" so much as I'd call it "horrific tragedy".

Quoted Text

That is exactly how I had to learn math! It worked well for me up through 2nd-semester calculus, because at that point, there was no getting around the need for memorization. I think I made my teachers a bit crazy, too, but I didn't let 'em go until I understood. Sometimes I had to talk to them after class to get that, but it was worth it.

You have to get your calculus grounding through a specific physics course, in the form of "physics with calculus"... because, you see, calculus was invented to be a tool for solving physics problems, as all the physics formulas are derived from observing the mathematical properties of the universe that ultimately turn out to be calculus. If you aren't introduced to calculus in that context, you have nothing to anchor the formulas to and, indeed, you are stuck with having to memorize... and still not understanding it.

Almost nobody is told this because, well, this is the kind of world we really do live in... a logic-hating world of cluelessness, fear, and trembling obedience.

Quoted Text

I was talking to a psychologist at a large university some time ago, and he said that he worked with students all the time who had been messed up by math teachers in their earliest years and had never gotten over it. I'm sure your skill at tutoring had a lot to do with helping students overcome damage done by unskilled teachers. One skill that is so important is to know where the student stands and start the teaching from there. I'm sure you were a great tutor!

Nothing destroys the mind quite like bad math teachers. And no other course quite develops the logical mind, quite like math. And when it's taught in a "Burger King employee" sort of way, what you do is scar the most important survival faculty that we human beings rely upon.

There's a new book on math that I think is absolutely outstanding, and it's written by the now grown-up actress Danica McKellar, who played the character "Winnie Cooper" on the now-syndicated TV show "The Wonder Years". Her book is called "Math Doesn't Suck", and here's a clip of her being interviewed on, of all places, Al Jazeera, about her life and her book. It's a great interview:

I test well on math in the few tests I have taken. (They didn't have those achievement tests every year like they do now!). But I have trouble memorizing lists or sequences. I can understand something like trig, but can't remember what I just heard.... My husband has a degree in physics & minor in math with apparently no trouble passing the courses. My older son got an engineering degree. So I vicarioulsy enjoy the math!However, apparently the population is very bad in math as it seems that merchants & businessmen are constantly juggling the numbers to make it look like they're offering a sale or better value. Even the cheating chiro was trying to convince me he was trying to save his clients money by juggling the insurance numbers. We women are not that stupid!!!! We're actually good in numbers. We remember anniversaries, etc., while men don't!!!Cheerio!Mrs "T" O+

Posted by: Chloe, Wednesday, January 30, 2008, 3:25pm; Reply: 21

Isn't there a left brain dominance vs. right brain dominance difference in men and women?

I'd expect that any individual regardless of sex might have a dominant left or right.

Subjects like music, language, art being right brained vs. math being left brained. I think Ispend most of my day in a right brained mode, even if my left brain is functional. It'sjust not turned ON most of the time.

I guess I simply didn't like math. It didn't satisfy my need for learning something interesting.The facts weren't compelling and they seemed rather abstract to me. The language of mathin general....a bunch of numbers that have to be added, subtracted, divided or multiplied.In the end, what do you have? MORE numbers?

Anyone having fun yet? Math does not resonate with my soul. While a teacher was standingin front of the room, furiously writing numbers on the blackboard, I was stuck inright brain....looking out the window, daydreaming and singing myself a little song~

I guess I simply didn't like math. It didn't satisfy my need for learning something interesting. The facts weren't compelling and they seemed rather abstract to me. The language of math in general....a bunch of numbers that have to be added, subtracted, divided or multiplied. In the end, what do you have? MORE numbers?

I can somewhat relate to this--I took college statistics, and though I passed, I somehow didn't learn anything. But when I took behavioral research methods, which taught the same statistics principles in a research context, I learned it! Being the "N" that I am, I enjoy concepts in abstract, but that only carries me so far in math. (Maybe that's the "F" part of my personality coming into play?)